Failing the test: Robinson does not deserve a medal

The criteria for the Presidential Medal of Freedom, by law, is supposed to go to those who have made "an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors." As Charles Lane, Washington Post journalist, notes, her record does not support the award.

Of the 588 Presidential Medals of Freedom given out since 1963, only 28 have gone to non-U.S. citizens -- less than 5 percent of the total. The bar is, and should be, a little higher for foreigners. Minor figures have slipped through (former NATO secretary-general Manlio Giovanni Brosio, for example). But for the most part, foreign recipients have been substantial people: Mother Teresa, Jacques Cousteau, Aung San Suu Kyi.

President George W. Bush pushed the limits of consensus a bit by including Tony Blair and Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, both disliked on the left. But neither was as polarizing as Robinson will be. Like the other foreign leaders on the list, they stood by the United States in perilous times.

Robinson, by contrast, got elected to Ireland's ceremonial presidency in 1990. This breakthrough came long after Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher had already proved that women can wield real political power. And she has consistently criticized U.S. foreign policy, often when U.S. troops were in the field.

How does her criticism of US policy, especially when American soldiers lives were on the line, fit the criteria that, by law, Obama must follow? Did it help American national security interests? No - nor does she fit any of the other criteria. In fact,  she fails those tests. Clearly, Obama does not care about the law or the tradition behind the award (recall, history started on January 20th of this year; just like the French revolution, the calendars have been changed).

Though she was primarily a Bush-basher, she also has been critical of Bill Clinton.

She condemned Bush's war on terror and recently implied that an independent war crimes inquiry might be appropriate for him. This is perhaps predictable, but in 1999 she also spoke up about potential illegality in President Bill Clinton's air campaign to rescue the mostly Muslim population of Kosovo from Serbian-led genocide. She condemned atrocities against the Kosovars, but she also thought the U.N. Security Council -- on which Serbia's ally Russia exercised a veto -- should "have a say in whether a prolonged bombing campaign in which the bombers choose their target at will is consistent with the principle of legality under the Charter of the United Nations."

Lane's superb column notes that even after she left the United Nations - where she helped make a mockery of its founding principles - she became President of the Ethical Globalization Initiative which she founded to make "human rights the compass which charts a course for globalization that is fair, just and benefits all". Lane notes that the organization seems to have done very little if anything, but does feature many photos of Mary Robinson (a narcissist honoring one of their own).

So what has she done? She was President of Ireland, a largely ceremonial position - a fact lost on many in America. She presided over a UN group and UN conference marked by anti-Israel bashing , anti-Americanism, and the coddling and protection of terror groups and regimes that truly do violate human rights.

The  trumpeting of the United Nations, the desire to constrain American power and make it subject to the United Nations, Bush-bashing, anti-Israel obsessions and actions: these are the new criteria that Barack Obama plans to follow as he chooses whom to honor and whom to empower.

Welcome to the Change Agent.

The criteria for the Presidential Medal of Freedom, by law, is supposed to go to those who have made "an especially meritorious contribution to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, cultural or other significant public or private endeavors." As Charles Lane, Washington Post journalist, notes, her record does not support the award.

Of the 588 Presidential Medals of Freedom given out since 1963, only 28 have gone to non-U.S. citizens -- less than 5 percent of the total. The bar is, and should be, a little higher for foreigners. Minor figures have slipped through (former NATO secretary-general Manlio Giovanni Brosio, for example). But for the most part, foreign recipients have been substantial people: Mother Teresa, Jacques Cousteau, Aung San Suu Kyi.

President George W. Bush pushed the limits of consensus a bit by including Tony Blair and Alvaro Uribe of Colombia, both disliked on the left. But neither was as polarizing as Robinson will be. Like the other foreign leaders on the list, they stood by the United States in perilous times.

Robinson, by contrast, got elected to Ireland's ceremonial presidency in 1990. This breakthrough came long after Indira Gandhi, Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher had already proved that women can wield real political power. And she has consistently criticized U.S. foreign policy, often when U.S. troops were in the field.

How does her criticism of US policy, especially when American soldiers lives were on the line, fit the criteria that, by law, Obama must follow? Did it help American national security interests? No - nor does she fit any of the other criteria. In fact,  she fails those tests. Clearly, Obama does not care about the law or the tradition behind the award (recall, history started on January 20th of this year; just like the French revolution, the calendars have been changed).

Though she was primarily a Bush-basher, she also has been critical of Bill Clinton.

She condemned Bush's war on terror and recently implied that an independent war crimes inquiry might be appropriate for him. This is perhaps predictable, but in 1999 she also spoke up about potential illegality in President Bill Clinton's air campaign to rescue the mostly Muslim population of Kosovo from Serbian-led genocide. She condemned atrocities against the Kosovars, but she also thought the U.N. Security Council -- on which Serbia's ally Russia exercised a veto -- should "have a say in whether a prolonged bombing campaign in which the bombers choose their target at will is consistent with the principle of legality under the Charter of the United Nations."

Lane's superb column notes that even after she left the United Nations - where she helped make a mockery of its founding principles - she became President of the Ethical Globalization Initiative which she founded to make "human rights the compass which charts a course for globalization that is fair, just and benefits all". Lane notes that the organization seems to have done very little if anything, but does feature many photos of Mary Robinson (a narcissist honoring one of their own).

So what has she done? She was President of Ireland, a largely ceremonial position - a fact lost on many in America. She presided over a UN group and UN conference marked by anti-Israel bashing , anti-Americanism, and the coddling and protection of terror groups and regimes that truly do violate human rights.

The  trumpeting of the United Nations, the desire to constrain American power and make it subject to the United Nations, Bush-bashing, anti-Israel obsessions and actions: these are the new criteria that Barack Obama plans to follow as he chooses whom to honor and whom to empower.

Welcome to the Change Agent.